philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 15, 2020 12:58:12 GMT 1
Does anyone know how does US government define importing aircraft? What about the lease company? This matter is defined by international agreements on customs, and on tariffs and trade, not by internal law. From what I remember, it doesn't matter whether a good is sold or leased : if it is introduced into a country and offered for consumption/put into service there, then it is subject to existing duties. If it is introduced but reexported without being offered for consumption/put into service, then it enjoys a suspension regime between importation and reexportation.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 15, 2020 12:28:30 GMT 1
Exactly how does this affect Airbus? Tariffs are intended to make imported goods more expensive to buy, hence less competitive. I don't know exactly how Airbus can mitigate the consequences for its customers, except perhaps by selling some parts and services separately while decreasing aircraft price. The key moment should be when WTO rules on the Europe vs USA case. If the EU is entitled to tax US aircraft imports, then a settlement ending tariffs on both sides will eventually be agreed upon. EDIT : I wonder whether after Brexit the UK will be free of such tariffs (not initially, I suppose), though anyhow I doubt Airbus could ship air frames and their Rolls-Royce engines to the USA separately ...
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 15, 2020 12:14:01 GMT 1
ALC probably found customer for 5 frames in 2023-24 delivery timeframe I hope so, but that may not be the case yet. The delivery dates may be those that ALC can offer to potential customers.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
A330neo
Feb 15, 2020 11:54:13 GMT 1
Post by philidor on Feb 15, 2020 11:54:13 GMT 1
Converting a A330-800 251 t to a tanker, would give a more capable frame than the current A330-200. True. Yet, would customers be ready to pay more for a comparatively small increase in loiter time ? I doubt it. With a given budget you could afford a larger fleet of -ceo than -neo. USAF engine selection shows how low tanker engine improvements are ranking on military priority lists. It does not have be tomorrow, but in a few years it could be a possibility. Airbus will keep selling tankers and one day they will want to stop producing the A330ceo. Airbus certainly would like to end -ceo production, but there is a reason why they said that a -neo tanker isn't in their plans. You need at least a launch customer to develop a new model and, even if one shows up, existing customers would likely decline to add a new variant to their fleet, so that a -neo might have a smaller market than a -ceo. In the long term, of course, who knows ... Actually I think we will see a new freighter first. It could be a A330-900F for volume or a A330-800 for long range work. This, I agree with !
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
A330neo
Feb 14, 2020 18:40:08 GMT 1
Post by philidor on Feb 14, 2020 18:40:08 GMT 1
No, this is a NEO frame, so I thought a trial conversion of a NEO 😉 Sorry, I didn't see your point. I doubt very much we'll see a A338/A339 tanker (whether converted or new-built) as armed forces in all countries are less interested by fuel savings than in a cheaper price. Furthermore, existing customers would not like to introduce heterogeneity into their tanker fleets. There might be new customers, but would Airbus develop a A338/A339 tanker for a couple of customers ? The only case I could see a A338/A339 tanker is if such a project was selected by the US Air Force, which is a long shot.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
A330neo
Feb 14, 2020 18:20:29 GMT 1
Post by philidor on Feb 14, 2020 18:20:29 GMT 1
Tanker conversion prototype next ? Two tanker conversions (from former Qantas airliners) have already been ordered by the Royal Australian Air Force. I don't know whether the work has already been completed.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 14, 2020 18:11:48 GMT 1
There seems to be a distinct increase in the number of parked EK A380s. Is it a consequence of the corona virus outbreak ?
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 14, 2020 18:07:22 GMT 1
To talk about. Oh it was just the simulator, is plainly absurd. That's your usual nice way of discussing. (****). Nobody ever taught you what a civil discussion is, and why such aggressivity should be reined in ? You also display a strong anti-Boeing bias, but in my opinion there is nothing wrong with that, it's just your opinion. The point of a simulator is, to simulate the airplane it is representing. A simulator that differs from the airplane is not just useless, but dangerous. The simulator and the simulated airplane compromise a system. Boeing tried to keep certain systems of the 737MAX, we know about MCAS, out of the simulator. To talk about. Oh it was just the simulator, is plainly absurd. The system was compomised. Yet, what exactly they were talking about makes a huge difference. If they had been talking of a dangerous aircraft and had kept the information to themselves, they would probably be prosecuted now. They may have hoped in good faith that the defective simulator would eventually be fixed, which may actually have been the case later.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 14, 2020 10:57:56 GMT 1
Airbus is pushing back the estimate for A220 programme break-even to the middle of the current decade, several years later than the 2020 timeline for which Bombardier had been aiming. Break even in 2020 was Bombardier's dream (or, rather, its spin). It was never going to happen at the current production pace. Mid-decade is consistent with Airbus' ramp-up plans, and I see that forecast as good news for the programme.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Feb 14, 2020 10:46:57 GMT 1
Is Jazeera Airways taking that aircraft in its present 'Ernest' livery ? I find it ugly !
|
|